John Ruskin (1819-1900) was an English art critic and social critic during the Victorian era. In 1843 he published Modern Painters which mainly served to defend the work of artist J.M.W Turner [1]. In this book, Ruskin argues that the artist’s main concern should be to truthfully depict nature. Ruskin continued to write on this topic and added four additional volumes to the book [2]. The second volume, published in 1846, was influential to the Pre-Raphaelites [3], a group that Ruskin later supported. This second volume drew on Ruskin’s religious beliefs. He believes that truthful perception and representation of nature led to a greater comprehension of God. In the third volume of Modern Painters, published in 1856, Ruskin uses the term “pathetic fallacy” to criticize what he saw as the excessively emotional and sentimental poetry of his contemporaries.
According to Ruskin, the pathetic fallacy is the attribution of a human emotion to an aspect of nature. The term also extends to any untruthful description applied to an aspect of nature. As an example, Ruskin includes a few lines poetry describing a crocus:
“The spendthrift crocus, bursting through the mold/Naked and shivering, with his cup of gold.”[4]
Ruskin states that these lines are “very beautiful and yet very untrue” [5] as a crocus cannot be a spend thrift. This attribution of a human quality to nature is a perfect example of what Ruskin sees as a pathetic fallacy. Ruskin then asks: “How is it that we enjoy so much the having it put into our heads
John Ruskin by John Everett Millais
that it is anything else than a plain crocus?” [6] He believes this to be a very important questions. Ruskin acknowledges that the usage of pathetic fallacy can make poetry enjoyable even though it is untrue. In this essay, Ruskin frequently mentions that pathetic fallacy in poetry is false and untrue, even if it can make art beautiful.
One of the main themes in Ruskin’s essay is his theory of the four classes of people:
“The men who see feel nothing, and therefore see truly”
“The men who feel strongly, think weakly, and see untruly”
“The men who feel strongly, think strongly, and see truly”
“The men who, strong as human creatures can be, are yet submitted to influences stronger than they, and see in a sort untruly, because what they see is inconceivable above them” [7]
Ruskin further synthesizes this list into what he calls the two orders of poets. The first order of poets are the poets who “feel strongly, think strongly, and see truly”[8]. These poets allow emotion to influence and inspire their work but they do not allow it to overtake it; therefore their work is a truthful representation of nature. According to Ruskin, Dante is a good examples of a first order poet. Even when Dante is “in his most intense moods, [he] has entire command of himself”[9] which allows him to depict what is around him truthfully and not weigh down his work with sentimentality. Ruskin also gives us an example of the second order of poets. The poets he mentions as of the “second order” are Ruskin’s contemporaries: Keats and Tennyson. He states that these poets, and poets like them, are “subdued by the feelings under which they write”[10] and therefore their poetry has an inherent falseness to it. To Ruskin, the kind of overt sentimentality of 19th century poets was clouding their work and inhibiting poets from giving a true representation of nature. Control over emotion is an important aspect of what Ruskin considers proper and truthful poetry. He believes that the skill and greatness of a poets relies on their “acuteness of feeling, and command of it” [11]. While it is desirable for a poet to feel deeply, they must be able to see truthfully through their emotions.
While Ruskin does believe that the usage of pathetic fallacy is not truthful poetry, he still believes there is a place for it; this place is in the minds of characters created by the first order of poets. Ruskin writes that if pathetic fallacy is “found in the thoughts of the poet himself” [12] it is a sign that the writer is from the second order of poets. However, if pathetic fallacy is found in the thoughts of the characters written by the poet, it is “implying necessarily some degree of weakness in the character” [13]. Even though it is undesirable for a poet to indulge in pathetic fallacy, their characters are allowed to have this weakness as this is an accurate representation of human nature.
Ruskin concludes his essay by again stating that he is not completely disapproving of the use of pathetic fallacy. He believes that while it can make for beautiful poetry, its inherent falseness should be recognized by the reader. In this essay Ruskin presents his idea that the control of a poets feelings leads to truthful poetry and therefore a truthful representation of nature.
Notes:
Robert Hewison, ‘Ruskin, John (1819-1900)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, 2004; online edn, Sept 2013. Retrieved 4 February 2015.
Ruskin, John. “Of the Pathetic Fallacy.” The Broadview Anthology of Victorian Poetry and Poetic Theory. Ed. Thomas J. Collins and Vivienne J. Rundle. Toronto: Broadview Press, 1999. 1283.
According to Ruskin, the pathetic fallacy is the attribution of a human emotion to an aspect of nature. The term also extends to any untruthful description applied to an aspect of nature. As an example, Ruskin includes a few lines poetry describing a crocus:
“The spendthrift crocus, bursting through the mold/Naked and shivering, with his cup of gold.”[4]
Ruskin states that these lines are “very beautiful and yet very untrue” [5] as a crocus cannot be a spend thrift. This attribution of a human quality to nature is a perfect example of what Ruskin sees as a pathetic fallacy. Ruskin then asks: “How is it that we enjoy so much the having it put into our heads
One of the main themes in Ruskin’s essay is his theory of the four classes of people:
Ruskin further synthesizes this list into what he calls the two orders of poets. The first order of poets are the poets who “feel strongly, think strongly, and see truly”[8]. These poets allow emotion to influence and inspire their work but they do not allow it to overtake it; therefore their work is a truthful representation of nature. According to Ruskin, Dante is a good examples of a first order poet. Even when Dante is “in his most intense moods, [he] has entire command of himself”[9] which allows him to depict what is around him truthfully and not weigh down his work with sentimentality. Ruskin also gives us an example of the second order of poets. The poets he mentions as of the “second order” are Ruskin’s contemporaries: Keats and Tennyson. He states that these poets, and poets like them, are “subdued by the feelings under which they write”[10] and therefore their poetry has an inherent falseness to it. To Ruskin, the kind of overt sentimentality of 19th century poets was clouding their work and inhibiting poets from giving a true representation of nature. Control over emotion is an important aspect of what Ruskin considers proper and truthful poetry. He believes that the skill and greatness of a poets relies on their “acuteness of feeling, and command of it” [11]. While it is desirable for a poet to feel deeply, they must be able to see truthfully through their emotions.
While Ruskin does believe that the usage of pathetic fallacy is not truthful poetry, he still believes there is a place for it; this place is in the minds of characters created by the first order of poets. Ruskin writes that if pathetic fallacy is “found in the thoughts of the poet himself” [12] it is a sign that the writer is from the second order of poets. However, if pathetic fallacy is found in the thoughts of the characters written by the poet, it is “implying necessarily some degree of weakness in the character” [13]. Even though it is undesirable for a poet to indulge in pathetic fallacy, their characters are allowed to have this weakness as this is an accurate representation of human nature.
Ruskin concludes his essay by again stating that he is not completely disapproving of the use of pathetic fallacy. He believes that while it can make for beautiful poetry, its inherent falseness should be recognized by the reader. In this essay Ruskin presents his idea that the control of a poets feelings leads to truthful poetry and therefore a truthful representation of nature.
Notes: